Page 16 of 22 FirstFirst ...
6
14
15
16
17
18
... LastLast
  1. #301
    Quote Originally Posted by Krawu View Post
    Isn't it worth letting one scumbag who was smart enough to encrypt his drive go if it means protecting the rights of those who didn't do anything wrong?
    How about the rights of those children he would go on assaulting if released?

  2. #302
    Quote Originally Posted by Elim Garak View Post
    Your book is irrelevant
    and so is your opinion

  3. #303
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by cparle87 View Post
    The Supreme Court only gets involved after a very long involved process involving lower courts. Until a higher court hears a case and rules against it, the rulings of the lower courts are still binding.
    no they aren't.
    If they were, this ruling would be null and void - because other federal courts have in similar cases said that this is an unconstitutional violation.

  4. #304
    The Unstoppable Force Elim Garak's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    DS9
    Posts
    20,295
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeta333 View Post
    and so is your opinion
    You are not arguing with my opinion, you are arguing with facts

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Flarelaine View Post
    How about the rights of those children he would go on assaulting if released?
    Well we let you walk free, even though you might be a serial killer.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Flarelaine View Post
    I believe contempt of court is one of the better things about the Angle-Saxon legal system. Yes, I understand it is abused occasionally. But consider an ex-communist country where a crony capitalist regime is steering steadily towards authoritarianism (such as the one I live in). Legally, everyone has the right to know where the money goes, but neither government bureaus nor state-owned enterprises are forthcoming. Requests for informations are the legal avenue, but they are denied, appealed to the end and when the courts still order the requests should be served, they just get ignored. With no consequence.
    You mean like they are breaking the law by not being forthcoming? You do know what "government" and "state-owned" means right? They cannot deny such requests because it's the law.
    All right, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side

  5. #305
    Quote Originally Posted by Elim Garak View Post
    You are not arguing with my opinion, you are arguing with facts

    - - - Updated - - -



    Well we let you walk free, even though you might be a serial killer.

    - - - Updated - - -



    You mean like they are breaking the law by not being forthcoming? You do know what "government" and "state-owned" means right? They cannot deny such requests because it's the law.
    your saying its a fact that people that collect and look at child porn are not bad? And dont belong in jail?

  6. #306
    Quote Originally Posted by GoblinP View Post
    no they aren't.
    If they were, this ruling would be null and void - because other federal courts have in similar cases said that this is an unconstitutional violation.
    Similar cases. Not this one. Every case is decided on its own merit. There's precedence, but other judges saying in similar cases that something is something does not preclude the judge from making a completely different ruling in this one.

  7. #307
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Tackhisis View Post
    You have to provide the access to your property for the search. The content of his hard drives is such kind of property.
    They have access, they just can't understand what they are reading on it. It's not even a grey zone of the law.

    They should release him or make a law specifically around not decrypting stuff.

  8. #308
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by cparle87 View Post
    Similar cases. Not this one. Every case is decided on its own merit. There's precedence, but other judges saying in similar cases that something is something does not preclude the judge from making a completely different ruling in this one.
    It's almost like that's exactly what i said.
    Oh wait.
    the rulings of the lower courts are still binding.
    no they aren't.

  9. #309
    Quote Originally Posted by Elim Garak View Post
    You mean like they are breaking the law by not being forthcoming? You do know what "government" and "state-owned" means right? They cannot deny such requests because it's the law.
    It is indeed the law. The law says they have to, the court says they have to, but neither comes with an "or else" clause. Contempt of court could serve as the latter in such cases.

  10. #310
    The Unstoppable Force Elim Garak's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    DS9
    Posts
    20,295
    Quote Originally Posted by Flarelaine View Post
    It is indeed the law. The law says they have to, the court says they have to, but neither comes with an "or else" clause. Contempt of court could serve as the latter in such cases.
    That's because there's no need for that. They are part of the government, so when government requests - they cannot deny. Otherwise it's corruption and a completely different can of worms with different tools to open it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeta333 View Post
    your saying its a fact that people that collect and look at child porn are not bad? And dont belong in jail?
    It's a fact that possession of child porn doesn't make one a child molester. Whether that should be legal or not - is a matter of opinion, but logic dictates that no harm is done. So a rational person would be against it being illegal.
    All right, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side

  11. #311
    Quote Originally Posted by Elim Garak View Post
    That's because there's no need for that. They are part of the government, so when government requests - they cannot deny. Otherwise it's corruption and a completely different can of worms with different tools to open it.
    You misunderstand. Citizens are requesting information from the government to make the latter accountable. The courts back the citizens, the government ignores them.

    And in the meantime, the Prime Minister's childhood pal is scooping up just about any procurement you can think of.

  12. #312
    The Unstoppable Force Elim Garak's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    DS9
    Posts
    20,295
    Quote Originally Posted by Flarelaine View Post
    You misunderstand. Citizens are requesting information from the government to make the latter accountable. The courts back the citizens, the government ignores them.

    And in the meantime, the Prime Minister's childhood pal is scooping up just about any procurement you can think of.
    Courts are the government. What you are talking about is corruption.
    All right, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side

  13. #313
    Quote Originally Posted by Elim Garak View Post
    Courts are the government. What you are talking about is corruption.
    It is, pure and simple.

  14. #314
    Quote Originally Posted by Elim Garak View Post
    That's because there's no need for that. They are part of the government, so when government requests - they cannot deny. Otherwise it's corruption and a completely different can of worms with different tools to open it.

    - - - Updated - - -



    It's a fact that possession of child porn doesn't make one a child molester. Whether that should be legal or not - is a matter of opinion, but logic dictates that no harm is done. So a rational person would be against it being illegal.
    So the fact that the people that do this to children are getting paid to keep doing it by the guy thats stitting in jail is ok? You are so fucking clearly out of touch with reality that you claim collecting child porn is a victim-less crime. People like you are whats wrong with society.

  15. #315
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeta333 View Post
    so then all child mollesters have to do is encrypt thier child porn and then they can never be charged for having it becuase you dont want to force them to unlock it. Sorry but thats not acceptable.
    For a minute, please consider the possibility that he doesn't have child porn. I'm not saying he doesn't, he probably does. But if he doesn't, and he really doesn't remember the password, is it okay that an innocent man will be in jail for the rest of his life for "refusing to comply?"

    Maybe your opinion is different, but what's worse in these opposing scenarios: (1) A guilty man gets away with having dirty pictures on his hard drive, or (2) an innocent man's life is completely ruined ??

    To me (2) is much worse.

    As other people have said, this sets a dangerous precedent. People should be imprisoned based on the evidence that exists, not the evidence that doesn't exist. There are plenty of situations where the variables in this case could be tweaked to apply to others.

    One other thing, the max sentence for possession of child pornography is 10 years. If you were truly guilty of something, would you prefer to not admit it at the cost of being in jail for the rest of your life, or fess up and get 0-10 years?

  16. #316
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeta333 View Post
    So the fact that the people that do this to children are getting paid to keep doing it by the guy thats stitting in jail is ok? You are so fucking clearly out of touch with reality that you claim collecting child porn is a victim-less crime. People like you are whats wrong with society.
    It depends if they aren't buying then the victim has already been victimized.

    let's replace this with murder.

    Say there are people who are paid to go and murder people on film. Someone pays to have someone murdered so they can watch a film.

    800 people then watch the murder film.

    2 person actually contributed to victimizing a person while the other 800 passively watched a murder and had nothing to do with the case as they provided no monetary support but instead found and downloaded the video.

  17. #317
    I am Murloc! Sting's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Your ignore list
    Posts
    5,216
    Quote Originally Posted by ge0 View Post
    For a minute, please consider the possibility that he doesn't have child porn. I'm not saying he doesn't, he probably does. But if he doesn't, and he really doesn't remember the password, is it okay that an innocent man will be in jail for the rest of his life for "refusing to comply?"

    Maybe your opinion is different, but what's worse in these opposing scenarios: (1) A guilty man gets away with having dirty pictures on his hard drive, or (2) an innocent man's life is completely ruined ??

    To me (2) is much worse.

    As other people have said, this sets a dangerous precedent. People should be imprisoned based on the evidence that exists, not the evidence that doesn't exist. There are plenty of situations where the variables in this case could be tweaked to apply to others.

    One other thing, the max sentence for possession of child pornography is 10 years. If you were truly guilty of something, would you prefer to not admit it at the cost of being in jail for the rest of your life, or fess up and get 0-10 years?
    Nice theoretical, but the practical case even has file hashes that match other documented cases of child pornography. This guy is guilty as hell and if they can't convict him for that just let him rot in prison for whatever other reason they can think off. That seems like justice to me.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    It depends if they aren't buying then the victim has already been victimized.

    let's replace this with murder.

    Say there are people who are paid to go and murder people on film. Someone pays to have someone murdered so they can watch a film.

    800 people then watch the murder film.

    2 person actually contributed to victimizing a person while the other 800 passively watched a murder and had nothing to do with the case as they provided no monetary support but instead found and downloaded the video.
    If there was a market large enough to make snuff films profitable, you can bet your ass that rules would be made to make possession illegal.
    ( ° ͜ʖ͡°)╭∩╮

    Quote Originally Posted by Kokolums View Post
    The fun factor would go up 1000x if WQs existed in vanilla

  18. #318
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeta333 View Post
    So the fact that the people that do this to children are getting paid to keep doing it by the guy thats stitting in jail is ok? You are so fucking clearly out of touch with reality that you claim collecting child porn is a victim-less crime. People like you are whats wrong with society.
    To be honest. I´d rather have them just convicting them for what they´ve got. And use the Ressources they are currently using to go after the aformentioned people who actually go after the Children.

  19. #319
    Quote Originally Posted by Sting View Post
    Nice theoretical, but the practical case even has file hashes that match other documented cases of child pornography. This guy is guilty as hell and if they can't convict him for that just let him rot in prison for whatever other reason they can think off. That seems like justice to me.
    He's not guilty as hell because he hasn't been tried by a jury yet.

  20. #320
    Quote Originally Posted by xqt View Post
    I dont think he has Information about the US Military on his HDD
    Thats not the point i'm trying to make tho.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •